I write in reference to the letter “Paid sick days are part of compensation package” (Nov. 22), about Gov. Chris Christie’s quest to end payments for unused sick leave. The law provides that each employee is entitled annually to 10 sick leave days per year as insurance against income loss. Commonly, the public employee may accumulate unused sick leave days for later use in the event of major illness. Contrary to the letter writer’s claim, the public employee may not use those days for anything other than recovery from illness.

Public employers in New Jersey opted long ago to pay retiring employees for unused sick leave days as incentive for employees not to misuse sick leave for vacation or personal business. This misguided decision now haunts employers and taxpayers with significant budget and tax impact.

Already paid for those days worked, the employee, upon retirement, may collect again. The average public employee will have 100 days of unused sick leave at retirement. The compensation is at the current per diem rate. Thus, 10 sick days unused and worth $90 per diem in 1991 are compensated in 2011 at $200 or more per diem or $20,000 for 100 days. Even at the usual $15,000 cap, that amounts to $105,000 for just seven retirees, a likely number for a large public entity in a given year. To rephrase the old saying, $100,000 here, $100,000 there, and soon you have some serious money.

This is what Gov. Christie is targeting. There should be no such reimbursement. The employee was protected by law from loss of income when sick. He was paid for the 10 contractual work days once and is not owed a second payment for any of those days. Sick leave should not be a ruse for double payment of contractual wages, as the letter writer appears to claim.

-- Murray Peyton,
Pennington

Seeking Muslim leader with courage of Churchill

In the 1930s, Winston Churchill, a Christian and a member of the British Parliament, was a lone voice among his peers in opposing Adolf Hitler’s expansionist plans for the primarily Christian German people. Many in Europe and America saw no harm in Germany’s militarism and nationalism —not until 1944, when Allied troops entered Germany, was the horror (concentration camps) of Germany’s ambitions made plain.
In the opinion article “Strong partnership awaits America and the Muslim world“ (Nov. 29), the writer asserts the “Arab Spring” will bring both democracy to those countries that have overthrown unsavory dictators and better relations with America. I wish I had his optimism.

Recent overthrows in that area have shown revivals of anti-Western sentiment. Egypt’s recent election gave 60 percent of the vote to the Muslim Brotherhood, which openly supported Germany during World War II, and the Salafis, who follow an even stricter interpretation of Islam. Moderates have been pushed aside, similar to what happened in Lebanon by Hamas.

Iran’s leader has denied the Holocaust occurred. His stated objective is to annihilate Israel. World safety is compromised if Iran is permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Britain’s economic response to Iran’s nuclear research produced, in retaliation, a storming of the British Embassy in Tehran, reminiscent of what happened at America’s Embassy in 1979. Other Western nations followed Britain in closing their embassies.

Individually, Muslims have long been recognized as instrumental in thwarting terrorist activities. But where are their political and religious leaders who would publicly condemn the activities of the radicals/terrorists, as Churchill did so many years ago with Germany?

-- Nicholas F. Debnarik Jr.,
Bordentown Township

Some responders could stand down

I found “Driver stages 4-hour standoff with police” (Dec. 1) both amusing and upsetting. According to the article, Pennsylvania state troopers chased a car to Ewing, the Ewing police became involved, the New Jersey State Police were called, the Mercer County sheriff’s office SERT team was sent out, and the U.S. marshal’s fugitive task force was there, as was a hostage negotiator. And let’s not forget about the plainclothes snipers positioned on the I-95 overpass.

All of these law-enforcement officers were called to arrest one man who wasn’t threatening anybody but himself. Did it really require that many officers, and am I the only one who thinks the response was excessive?

We need and respect the police and want them to respond and to be there in emergency situations, but how can they, when they are all out there chasing one person?

-- Ron Dockter,
Ewing Township

Let’s put sewer boondoggle up for referendum

Four out of five Hopewell Township Committee members recently authorized a $4 million bond ordinance to reserve 267,000 gallons of sewage treatment capacity from the Ewing-Lawrence Sewerage Authority (ELSA) to serve the southern portion of Hopewell Township. There are two major issues with the ordinance.

1) We can reliably count on only half of the 267,000 gallons being used by existing businesses and residents that have malfunctioning septic systems.

2) Much of the remaining reserved capacity has been set aside for affordable housing in the southern tier despite the fact that state regulations on how much affordable housing is required have yet to be promulgated.

So, now that the committee has made the commitment, who will be responsible for paying for that which may never be used? It will be the taxpayers of Hopewell Township! Our taxes will go up as a result of the committee’s irresponsible decision.

A group of residents, the Hopewell Township Citizens for Tax Choice, is asking the township to put the bond ordinance to a public referendum. A petition to protest the bonding of $4 million is available. People who would like to sign it can contact me at (609) 915-0037. Township taxpayers can now personally be part of the decision-making process on whether their taxes go up in the Hopewell Valley. The petition must be submitted to the township by Dec. 19.

-- Robert Kecskes,
Hopewell Township
The writer is chairman of the nonprofit Hopewell Township Citizens for Tax Choice.

Manage bears humanely

The New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife desperately needs a new bear management strategy. It needs to make the humane choice to enforce New Jersey garbage control laws.

I believe the division has promoted fear by tracking and killing the black bears that have gotten into garbage cans. Securing garbage is the law in this state, and an agency that has been given the task of enforcing it instead sets up trophy hunts.

I suggest that New Jersey put into place a team that will monitor bear activity and complaints about bears — a team that includes bear advocates.

It is time for real bear management. The vast majority of New Jersey voters do not support hunting, nor are they in favor of Fish and Wildlife creating trophy hunting situations for that 1 percent of state residents who want to hunt and kill another living being for sport.

-- Jennifer Alford,
Sparta

Fracking puts pressure on N.J.’s environment

After an initial review of the Christie administration’s Energy Master Plan (“Plan re-ignites the energy debate — State’s revised proposal too easy on gas, critics say,” Dec. 7), I remain concerned about the stance it has incorporated on fracking.

The “environmental ramifications” of fracking will be far outweighed by the ramifications for the health of all New Jersey citizens if fracking starts in the Delaware River Basin.

We must not allow fracking to destroy New Jersey’s water supply to achieve cheaper natural gas. We must put the conservation of energy and renewable energy sources at the forefront of New Jersey’s plan for the future.

-- Connie Wagner,
Paramus
The writer, a Democrat, represents the 38th District in the New Jersey General Assembly.